The Chalukyas of Badami (or Chalukyas of Vatapi)
[1]
ruled over an area roughly corresponding to the modern-day Indian states of Goa, Karnataka, Maharashtra, Telangana, the region of South Gujarat, half of the state of Madhya Pradesh, the Rayaseema district and half the Andhra district of Andhra Pradesh.
[2]
This polity was founded in 543 CE, when Pulakesin I established the capital of Badami or Vatapi,
[3]
and it was supplanted by the Rashtrakuta polity in the 750s.
[4]
The peak of the polity can be considered to correspond to the reign of Pulakesin II (609-643 CE), who re-established his dynasty’s power throughout much of the Deccan after a period of instability, further extended the empire’s bounds through a series of successful military campaigns, and founded new dynastic lines in eastern India and in the Gujarat region.
[5]
Population and political organization
At the head of this polity was an emperor, who often ruled over conquered territories indirectly, through feudal subordinates or family relations.
[6]
The emperor was also the polity’s supreme military commander.
[7]
In both military and administrative matters, he was assisted by the sandhivigrahika, or minister of war and peace: the only minister in the emperor’s council mentioned explicitly in Chalukya inscriptions, and probably the most powerful.
[7]
No population estimates for the entire polity could be found in the literature. However, the capital may have been inhabited by as many as 70,000 people.
[8]
[1]: (Kadambi 2007, 158) Hemanth Kadambi. 2007. ’Negotiated Pasts and Memorialized Present in Ancient India’, in Negotiating the Past in the Past: Identity, Memory, and Landscape in Archaeological Research, edited by Norman Yoffee, 155-82. Tucson, AZ: University of Arizona Press.
[2]: (Kamath 1980) Suryanath Kamath. 1980. A Concise History of Karnataka: From Pre-historic Times to the Present. Bangalore: Archana Prakashana.
[3]: (Kadambi 2007, 178) Hemanth Kadambi. 2007. ’Negotiated Pasts and Memorialized Present in Ancient India’, in Negotiating the Past in the Past: Identity, Memory, and Landscape in Archaeological Research, edited by Norman Yoffee, 155-82. Tucson, AZ: University of Arizona Press.
[4]: (Basavaraja 1984, 62) K. R. Basavaraja. 1984. History and Culture of Karnataka: Early Times to Unification. Dharwad: Chalukya Publications.
[5]: (Sastri 1960, 212) K. A. Nilakanta Sastri. 1960. ’The Chalukyas of Badami’, in The Early History of the Deccan, Vol. 1, edited by Ghulam Yazdani, 201-46. London: Oxford University Press.
[6]: (Dikshit 1980, 219-21) D. P. Dikshit. 1980. Political History of the Chalukyas of Badami. New Delhi: Abhinav Publications.
[7]: (Dikshit 1980, 267) D. P. Dikshit. 1980. Political History of the Chalukyas of Badami. New Delhi: Abhinav Publications.
[8]: Christopher Chase-Dunn 2001, personal communication.
| 43 P |
| Chalukyas of Badami |
| Badami |
| Badami Dynasty | |
| Chalukyas of Badami | |
| Chalukyas of Vatapi | |
| Chalukyas of Vathapi |
| none |
| Rashtrakuta Empire |
| continuity |
| Preceding: Kadamba Empire (in_kadamba_emp) [continuity] | |
| Succeeding: Rashtrakuta Empire (in_rashtrakuta_emp) [elite replacement] |
| unitary state |
| unknown |
| unknown |
| inferred present |
| present |
| absent |
| inferred present |
| unknown |
| present |
| inferred present |
| unknown |
| unknown |
| present |
| unknown |
| inferred present |
| inferred present |
| inferred present |
| unknown |
| present |
| inferred present |
| inferred present |
| Year Range | Chalukyas of Badami (in_badami_chalukya_emp) was in: |
|---|---|
| (541 CE 756 CE) | Deccan |
[1] . It is worth noting that the ruling dynasty is both known as Chalukyas of Badami and Chalukyas of Vatapi (or Vathapi or Vatapai).
[1]: http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/90201/Chalukya-dynasty
[1] . It is worth noting that the ruling dynasty is both known as Chalukyas of Badami and Chalukyas of Vatapi (or Vathapi or Vatapai).
[1]: http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/90201/Chalukya-dynasty
[1] . It is worth noting that the ruling dynasty is both known as Chalukyas of Badami and Chalukyas of Vatapi (or Vathapi or Vatapai).
[1]: http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/90201/Chalukya-dynasty
[1] . It is worth noting that the ruling dynasty is both known as Chalukyas of Badami and Chalukyas of Vatapi (or Vathapi or Vatapai).
[1]: http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/90201/Chalukya-dynasty
Despite inheriting an empire torn apart by succession wars and the rebellions of provincial rulers, Pulakesin II was able to re-establish his dynasty’s power through much of the Deccan, further extended the empire’s bounds through a series of successful military campaigns, and founded new dynastic lines in Eastern India and in the Gujarat region
[1]
.
[1]: K.A. Nilakanta Sastri, The Chalukyas of Badami, in G. Yasdan, The Early History of the Deccan, vol. 1 (1960), pp. 212
The start of the Chalukya Empire is generally said to coincide with the establishment of Badami as capital, and its end with with the last Emperor’s military defeat at the hands of the Rashtrakutas
[1]
.
Pulakesi I (543-566); Kirtivarman I (566-597); Mangalesa (597-609); Pulakesi II (609-642); Vikramaditya I (655-680); Vinayaditya (680-696); Vijayaditya (696-733); Vikramaditya II (733-746); Kirtivarman II (746-753); Dantidurga (753-756).
[2]
Ed: Notice that there is a gap between 642-655 CE.
[1]: http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/90201/Chalukya-dynasty
[2]: (Pant 2012, 31) Ashok Pant. 2012. The Truth of Babri Mosque. iUniverse. Bloomington.
[1] .
[1]: H. Kadambi, Negotiated Pasts and Memorialized Present in Ancient India, in N. Yoffee (ed), Negotiating the Past in the Past (2008), p. 158
In the first half of the eighth century, the Chalukyas ruled over Western and Central India. However, in the ’40s and early ’50s of that century, they found themselves in a position of weakness, due to the death of their leader, Vikramaditya II, as well as prolonged conflict with Arabs and the Pallavas to the North. One of their feudatories to the South, Dantidurga, exploited this moment of weakness to annex several territories to his own rule. By the time he had secured dominion over Madhya Pradesh and Central and Southern Gujarat, the Chalukyas declared war against him, but were defeated in battle in 753 CE. This is the year when the Rashtrakuta Empire is said to have started, with Dantidurga as its first ruler. Once the Chalukyas were definitively overthrown by Dantidurga’s successor, Krishna I, the Rashtrakutas’ military and diplomatic endeavours focused mostly on two objectives: securing control over Southern India, particularly the Deccan Plateau, and organising military expeditions to the North. [1]
[1]: K.R. Basavaraja, History and Culture of Karnataka (1984), pp. 62-83
in squared kilometers. Roughly the equivalent of the sum of the modern-day Indian states of Goa, Karnataka, Maharashtra, Telangana, the region of South Gujarat, half of the state of Madhya Pradesh, the Rayaseema district and half the Andhra district of Andhra Pradesh.
levels.
_Hinduism_
There are no official priestly hierarchies in Hinduism
[1]
. However, several sources allude to the importance, at least for some branches of the religion, of the relationship between student and teacher or guru (e.g.
[2]
), which suggests that perhaps it would not be entirely inappropriate to say that there is indeed a Hindu religious hierarchy, and that it is composed of two levels.
_Jainism_
NOTE: I have found two equally authoritative sources on Jain hierarchy:
(1)
[3]
1. Arihants (ones who have conquered their inner enemies)2. Siddhas (Liberated Ones)3. Acharyas (who head the Order)4. Upadhyays (who teach the message)5. Sadhus (Monks/Seekers)
(2)
[4]
1. Guru (teacher)2. Monks
2. Male figure (not specified by author whether a monk) in charge of nuns3. Pravartini or ganini (aides to the male figure in charge of nuns)4. Nuns
_Buddhism_
"Buddhist monastic communities replaced the caste system with one based on year of ordination. Previously ordained monks enjoyed rights and privileges higher in status than monks ordained later, and monks were categorically of higher status and privilege than nuns. In effect seniority and gender provided criteria for social status and increased access to ’pure’ teachings and exemption from ’impure’ duties."
[5]
.
[1]: http://ezinearticles.com/?Religious-Hierarchy-in-Hinduism&id=1864556
[2]: G. Flood, Introduction, in G. Flood (ed), The Blackwell Comapnion to Hinduism (2003), p. 4
[3]: Singh, Upinder. A History of Ancient and Early medieval India, pp 312-319
[4]: M. Adiga, The Making of Southern Karnataka (2006), pp. 269-276
[5]: P. Nietupsky, Hygiene: Buddhist Perspective, in W.M. Johnson, Encyclopedia of Monasticism (2000), p. 628
levels.
1. Emperor
[1]
2. Sandhivigrahika (minister of war and peace)
[1]
3. Mahabaladihktra or mahasandhivigrahikaMost likely the chief general, perhaps assigned the duty of assisting the minister of war and peace and/or supervising ten other generals
[1]
4. Officials supervised by the mahabaladihktra or mahasandhivigrahika
[1]
- presumably more than one level5. Soldiers
[1]
[1]: D.P. Dikshit, Political History of the Chalukyas (1980), p. 267
levels.
1. Emperor
[1]
.
_Court_
2. Sandhivigrahika (Minister of War and Peace)This is the only minister in the Emperor’s council mentioned explicitly in Chalukya inscriptions, and there is much evidence that this was the most powerful of the ministers
[2]
. Indeed, it seems that, on at least one occasion, the sandhivigrahika also held the post of "chief of the secretariat" (divirapati) and was in charge of revenue administration (akshapataladhikaranadhipati)
[3]
.
3. Other ministersRecords here are a bit fuzzy. These "ministers and other administrators" may include the keeper of records, a guru, as well as the Crown Prince
[1]
and other loyal members of the royal family, including the Queen
[4]
. And, presumably, the divirapati and the akshapataladhikaranadhipati
[3]
, in those occasions where they were not titles held by the sandhivigrahika.
4. Administrative officialsThe long list of administrative officials includes: diviras (clerks) and akshapatalikas (revenue officers)
[3]
; baladhirkta or mahabaladhirtkas (military officials with administrative duties); dutakas (in charge of conveyance of royal grants); durgapatis (fort administrators); dandapasika and chauradhikarana (in charge of crime and punishment); chatas and batas (possibly police-like officers); vasavakas (in charge of arranging the residences of touring officials and foreigners); viniyuktakas (unclear); gamagamikas (supervised egress and ingress of travellers, including inspecting "passports")
[5]
5.e.g. senior batas?
6.e.g. batas?
_Provincial Government_
2. "Viceroys"Members of the royal family who ruled over vishayas, or provinces
[6]
.
2. Rajasamantas or "Governors"Defeated rulers whom the Emperor trusted to keep in charge of their territories, now made into vishayas, or provinces
[7]
. It is not entirely clear, from the source, whether rajasamanta and "governor" are the same office.
3. SamantasFeudal subordinates of the rajasamantas, they provided troops and tribute to the Emperor when required
[8]
.
4. Town assembliesMade up of elders (mahajanas), guild chiefs, mahallakas, and "head of business communities"
[9]
.
5. Village administrationMade up of mahajanas (elders), mahattaras, mahattaradhikarins and gavundas (royal representatives)
[9]
. There also existed "gramabhogikas" or "village leaders" and karanas or "village accountants"
[10]
, but it is unclear what their position was in relation to other village administrators.
[1]: Suryanatha Kamath, A Concise History of Karnataka (1980), p. 70
[2]: D.P. Dikshit, Political History of the Chalukyas (1980), pp. 211-212
[3]: D.P. Dikshit, Political History of the Chalukyas (1980), pp. 213-214
[4]: D.P. Dikshit, Political History of the Chalukyas (1980), pp. 208-210
[5]: D.P. Dikshit, Political History of the Chalukyas (1980), pp. 224-230
[6]: D.P. Dikshit, Political History of the Chalukyas (1980), p. 219
[7]: D.P. Dikshit, Political History of the Chalukyas (1980), pp. 220
[8]: D.P. Dikshit, Political History of the Chalukyas (1980), pp. 219-220
[9]: D.P. Dikshit, Political History of the Chalukyas (1980), p. 222
[10]: D.P. Dikshit, Political History of the Chalukyas (1980), p. 228
A guru may have been part of the Emperor’s ministerial council [1] . Hinduism had its representatives in Brahmanas [2] , Jainism and Buddhism in monks [3] [4] .
[1]: Suryanatha Kamath, A Concise History of Karnataka (1980), p. 70
[2]: L. Rocher, The Dharmasastras, in G. Flood (ed), The Balckwell Companion to Hinduism (2003), p. 103
[3]: http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/jainism/worship/ministry.shtml
[4]: L. Aldritt, Buddhism (2009), p. 12
In the below quote, Rocher argues that professional lawyers did not exist in India for much of its history. Unhelpfully, Rocher does not provide dates or much in the way of temporal boundaries. However, the use of the word “ever” in the sentence “no written source allows us to draw the conclusion that the experts on legal matters ever developed into a professional group whose regular activities consisted in representing parties in the court” may perhaps be taken to mean that professional lawyers did not exist in India before the colonial era.
“Thus, we believe that at an early date—let us roughly say at the time of the dharmasutras—professional lawyers or, to be more precise, specialized dharmasastrins could not exist. The Indian sage in those days was a specialist in all of the texts related to a particular Vedic school. His specialized knowledge concentrated on a specific version of the Vedic samhita and all its related texts: brahmana, aranyaka, upanisad, srautasutra, grhyasutra, dharmasutra, etc. There were no specialists on dharmasastra, and, a fortiori, no specialists on law that were part of it.
“But the situation changed. The texts on dharma grew away from the Vedic schools. Gradually there may have come into being a specialized group of learned men whose main interest was dharma, and the various dharmasastras as such.
“Finally, as the amount of textual material increased, we may assume that certain experts, without detaching themselves completely from aspects of dharmasastra and from Hindu learning generally, accumulated a very specialized knowledge of one aspect of dharma: vivada and vyavahara, or, in modern terminology, law. It is very possible that at this stage the nature of legal representation (niyoga) also underwent a certain change. We do not want to exclude the possibility that, at that moment, in a number of cases legal competence played a role in the choice of a representative. We are even willing to accept that Vyasa refers to the very special circumstance in which the representative was paid for his services. However, no written source allows us to draw the conclusion that the experts on legal matters ever developed into a professional group whose regular activities consisted in representing parties in the court. The impression which we gather from the texts is that, even in cases where the representative was chosen because of his special competence on legal matters, and, a fortiori, in all other cases, the necessary condition for a person to represent a party was the existence, between the former and the latter, of a certain form of close personal relationship.”
[1]
[1]: (Rocher 1969: 399-400) Rocher, L. 1969. "Lawyers" in Classical Hindu Law. Law & Society Review 3 (2/3): 383-402. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/QKMEMIHW/library
Smirtis and dharmashastras [1] . The Smriti, or Manu-smriti, is a collection of texts prescribing correct behaviour, including a section explicitly devoted to "the law of kings" [2] , while the dharmashastras are a collection of more explicitly legal texts [3] .
[1]: D.P. Dikshit, Political History of the Chalukyas (1980), p. 230
[2]: http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/363055/Manu-smriti
[3]: http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/160730/Dharma-shastra
likely used by government officials
likely used by government officials
No persuasive evidence could be found, in the literature consulted, for the existence of a postal service of any kind in India, between the end of the Mauryan period and the fourteenth century, when Ibn Battuta visited the Delhi Sultanate and described its communication services. However, it is entirely possible that such systems existed in at least some polities, especially the larger ones.
No persuasive evidence could be found, in the literature consulted, for the existence of a postal service of any kind in India, between the end of the Mauryan period and the fourteenth century, when Ibn Battuta visited the Delhi Sultanate and described its communication services. However, it is entirely possible that such systems existed in at least some polities, especially the larger ones.
No persuasive evidence could be found, in the literature consulted, for the existence of a postal service of any kind in India, between the end of the Mauryan period and the fourteenth century, when Ibn Battuta visited the Delhi Sultanate and described its communication services. However, it is entirely possible that such systems existed in at least some polities, especially the larger ones.
During the Satavahana period towns were protected by "high walls" [1] but the construction materials and methods are not mentioned. "The temple is enclosed by a stone wall and has evidently been used as a fort. On the outside of the east wall of the temple is a stone inscription of the Early Chalukya dynasty..." [2]
[1]: S. Kamath, A Concise History of Karnataka (1980), p. 27
[2]: (1884, 546) 1884. Gazetteer of the Bombay Presidency: Bijápur. Government Central Press.
Commenting on Jean Deloche’s ’Studies on Fortification in India’ a book reviewer says that fort construction "with long-term building and modification programs ... became the focal point for local populations as well as for their leaders" and often were "placed at points on the landscape that already were natural strongholds and places of ritual devolution". [1]
[1]: (Smith 2010, 273) Monica L Smith. January 2010. Journal of the American Oriental Society. 130.2. Studies on Fortification in India. Collection Indologie, vol. 104. Four Forts of the Deccan vol. 111. Senji (Gingee): A Fortified City in the Tamil Country. vol. 101 by Jean Deloche.
Present for the Satavahana period. [1] Kautilya’s Arthasastra, written after 200 BCE, mentions ramparts constructed with earth and moats. [2]
[1]: (Chakrabarti 1995, 306) D K Chakrabarti. Post-Mauryan states of mainland South Asia (c. BC 185-AD 320). F R Allchin. 1995. The Archaeology of Early Historic South Asia: The Emergence of Cities and States. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge.
[2]: (Olivelle 2016, 103) Patrick Olivelle trans. 2016. King, Governance, and Law in Ancient India: Kautilya’s Arthasastra. Oxford University Press. Oxford.
"Till date, the best study of the evolution of fortifications in India from the Indus Valley Civilization till the rise of British power, remains Deloche’s monograph on fortification in India. Deloche notes that between the third and fourteenth centuries, the Hindu rulers constructed complex gateways, towers and thicker walls with earthen embankments in order to make their durgas (forts) impregnable." [1] Deloche’s studies on Indian fortifications are in French. Ditches and moats were present during the Satavahana period [2] and the simpler technology of earth rampart is therefore also likely. Kautilya’s Arthasastra, written after 200 BCE, mentions ramparts constructed with earth and moats. [3]
[1]: (Roy 2011, 123) Kaushik Roy. Historiographical Survey of the Writings on Indian Military History. Sabyasachi Bhattacharya. ed. 2011. Approaches to History: Essays in Indian Historiography. Primus Books. Delhi.
[2]: (Chakrabarti 1995, 306) D K Chakrabarti. Post-Mauryan states of mainland South Asia (c. BC 185-AD 320). F R Allchin. 1995. The Archaeology of Early Historic South Asia: The Emergence of Cities and States. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge.
[3]: (Olivelle 2016, 103) Patrick Olivelle trans. 2016. King, Governance, and Law in Ancient India: Kautilya’s Arthasastra. Oxford University Press. Oxford.
Metal armour was used for both warriors and horses [1] . Type of metal not specified. Indian iron smiths invented the ’wootz’ method of steel creation between 550-450 BCE. The Greek physician Ctesias of Cnidus commented on an Indian steel sword in the possession of Artaxerxes II of Persia (c400 BCE). [2]
[1]: D.P. Dikshit, Political History of the Chalukyas (1980), p. 266
[2]: (Singh 1997, 102) Sarva Daman Singh. 1997. Ancient Indian Warfare: With Special Reference to the Vedic Period. Motilal Banarsidass Publishers. Delhi.
Metal armour was used for both warriors and horses [1] . Type of metal not specified. Indian iron smiths invented the ’wootz’ method of steel creation between 550-450 BCE. The Greek physician Ctesias of Cnidus commented on an Indian steel sword in the possession of Artaxerxes II of Persia (c400 BCE). [2]
[1]: D.P. Dikshit, Political History of the Chalukyas (1980), p. 266
[2]: (Singh 1997, 102) Sarva Daman Singh. 1997. Ancient Indian Warfare: With Special Reference to the Vedic Period. Motilal Banarsidass Publishers. Delhi.
According to Jaina texts, Ajatashatru, a 5th century BCE king of Magadha in North India, used a catapult "capable of hurling huge pieces of stone". [1] A military historian reports that ancient Indians had a weapon called the yantra that "may refer to a device for hurling stones and missiles at the enemy, but we have no information as to its design." [2] - what do specialist scholars of this period know about this? Ancient Indian armies had siege engines that could "fling stones and lead balls wrapped up in burning materials. The Mahabharata mentions an Asma-yantra (a stone-throwing machine) in the battle with Jarasandha and we have further records that such engines were used in later periods to set enemy fortifications alight and that ’liquid fires’ containing naphtha were in use in ancient India." [3]
[1]: (Singh 2008, 272) Upinder Singh. 2008. A History of Ancient and Early Medieval India: From the Stone Age to the 12th Century. Pearson Longman. Delhi.
[2]: (Gabriel 2007, 126-127) Richard A Gabriel. 2007. The Ancient World. Greenwood Publishing Group. Westport.
[3]: (Forbes 1959, 88-89) Robert James Forbes. 1959. More studies in early petroleum history. Brill Archive.
Byzantines, or perhaps the Chinese, were the first.
Present for earlier Satavahanas but for this time no data.
Artistic and written evidence for the use of bow and arrow (bow type not specified) [1] In the hot Monsoon climate of India the composite bow decomposed rapidly so Ancient Indians made bows out of Wootz steel. These were "considerably more rigid than their composite bretheren, meaning they were also less powerful. But they were reliable and predictable, and could be stored away in munitions vaults without worry of decomposition." [2] "The Hindus used bows made of cane or bamboos which were inferior in range, accuracy and penetrative power when compared to the composite bows." [3] Composite bow came to India with the Kushanas but "after the collapse of the Gupta Empire, the use of composite bows died out in India." [3]
[1]: D.P. Dikshit, Political History of the Chalukyas (1980), p. 266
[2]: (O’Bryan 2013, 54) A History of Weapons: Crossbows, Caltrops, Catapults & Lots of Other Things that Can Seriously Mess You Up. Chronicle Books LLC. San Francisco.
[3]: (Roy 2011, 122) Kaushik Roy. Historiographical Survey of the Writings on Indian Military History. Sabyasachi Bhattacharya. ed. 2011. Approaches to History: Essays in Indian Historiography. Primus Books. Delhi.
"The hand crossbow was usd on Indian battlefields probably from the third century A.D. It was mainly used as an infantry weapon and occasionally as a cavalry weapon. A Sanskrit inscription at Avanthipuram, in South India, reads: ’... Of him who has the name of Ananta impelled with speed and skillfully discharged from the machines of his bow fitted with the well stretched string....’ Obviously, the machine referred to was a hand crossbow." [1]
[1]: (Phillips 2016) Henry Pratap Phillips. 2016. The History and Chronology of Gunpowder and Gunpowder Weapons (c.1000 to 1850). Notion Press.
"The Hindus used bows made of cane or bamboos which were inferior in range, accuracy and penetrative power when compared to the composite bows." [1] Composite bow came to India with the Kushanas but "after the collapse of the Gupta Empire, the use of composite bows died out in India." [1]
[1]: (Roy 2011, 122) Kaushik Roy. Historiographical Survey of the Writings on Indian Military History. Sabyasachi Bhattacharya. ed. 2011. Approaches to History: Essays in Indian Historiography. Primus Books. Delhi.
"There was no significant change in the weaponry of the Indian army from ancient to classical times; in fact, according to Kosambi, there was a decline in the standard of arms. Indian soldiers were mostly very poorly equipped, noted Marco Polo." [1]
[1]: (Eraly 2011, 169) Abraham Eraly. 2011. The First Spring: The Golden Age of India. Penguin Books India Pvt. Ltd. New Delhi.
[1] "The Chalukyan army no doubt consisted of infantry, cavalry, chariots and elephants, besides the naval unit." [2] By the medieval period cavalry had mostly relegated the chariot to ceremonial function. [3] "In the classical age, Indian armies were still organized, as they had been a thousand years earlier, into four divisions: infantry, cavalry, chariots and elephants." [4]
[1]: H.V. Sreenivasa Murthy and R. Ramakrishnan, A History of Karnataka (1978), p. 75
[2]: (Dikshit 1980, 263) Durga Prasad Dikshit. 1980. Political History of the Chalukyas of Badami. Abhinav Publications. New Delhi.
[3]: (Dikshit 1980, 265) Durga Prasad Dikshit. 1980. Political History of the Chalukyas of Badami. Abhinav Publications. New Delhi.
[4]: (Eraly 2011, 163) Abraham Eraly. 2011. The First Spring: The Golden Age of India. Penguin Books India Pvt. Ltd. New Delhi.
[1] "The Chalukyan army no doubt consisted of infantry, cavalry, chariots and elephants, besides the naval unit." [2] "In the classical age, Indian armies were still organized, as they had been a thousand years earlier, into four divisions: infantry, cavalry, chariots and elephants." [3]
[1]: H.V. Sreenivasa Murthy and R. Ramakrishnan, A History of Karnataka (1978), p. 75
[2]: (Dikshit 1980, 263) Durga Prasad Dikshit. 1980. Political History of the Chalukyas of Badami. Abhinav Publications. New Delhi.
[3]: (Eraly 2011, 163) Abraham Eraly. 2011. The First Spring: The Golden Age of India. Penguin Books India Pvt. Ltd. New Delhi.
In ancient India the buffalo, bullock, yak, goat, camel, elephant, horse, ass and the mule were all used for transport [1] [2] in different regions according to local conditions. [2]
[1]: (Mishra 1987, 83) Kamal Kishore Mishra. 1987. Police Administration in Ancient India. Mittal Publications. Delhi.
[2]: Prakash Charan Prasad. 1977. Foreign Trade and Commerce in Ancient India. Abhinav Publications. New Delhi.
In ancient India the buffalo, bullock, yak, goat, camel, elephant, horse, ass and the mule were all used for transport [1] [2] in different regions according to local conditions. [2]
[1]: (Mishra 1987, 83) Kamal Kishore Mishra. 1987. Police Administration in Ancient India. Mittal Publications. Delhi.
[2]: Prakash Charan Prasad. 1977. Foreign Trade and Commerce in Ancient India. Abhinav Publications. New Delhi.
"Several Chalukyan epigraphs refer to kavacha or armour. A good number of sculptures at Badami, Aihole and Pattadakal show not only armoured soldiers but also caparisoned horses. Metal armours served as shields against attack by enemies, protecting both men and animal forces." [1] Kautilya’s Arthasastra, written after 200 BCE, mentions metal fabric, metal plate, cuirass, corselet, mail and breast plate. [2]
[1]: (Dikshit 1980, 266) Durga Prasad Dikshit. 1980. Political History of the Chalukyas of Badami. Abhinav Publications. New Delhi.
[2]: (Olivelle 2016, 142-143) Patrick Olivelle trans. 2016. King, Governance, and Law in Ancient India: Kautilya’s Arthasastra. Oxford University Press. Oxford.
Ancient Indians used iron for armour cuirasses and breastplates but copper was also used. [1] "Several Chalukyan epigraphs refer to kavacha or armour. A good number of sculptures at Badami, Aihole and Pattadakal show not only armoured soldiers but also caparisoned horses. Metal armours served as shields against attack by enemies, protecting both men and animal forces." [2] Kautilya’s Arthasastra, written after 200 BCE, mentions metal plate, cuirass, corselet and breast plate. [3]
[1]: (Singh 1997) Sarva Daman Singh. 1997. Ancient Indian Warfare: With Special Reference to the Vedic Period. Motilal Banarsidass Publishers. Delhi.
[2]: (Dikshit 1980, 266) Durga Prasad Dikshit. 1980. Political History of the Chalukyas of Badami. Abhinav Publications. New Delhi.
[3]: (Olivelle 2016, 142-143) Patrick Olivelle trans. 2016. King, Governance, and Law in Ancient India: Kautilya’s Arthasastra. Oxford University Press. Oxford.
"Several Chalukyan epigraphs refer to kavacha or armour. A good number of sculptures at Badami, Aihole and Pattadakal show not only armoured soldiers but also caparisoned horses. Metal armours served as shields against attack by enemies, protecting both men and animal forces." [1] Kautilya’s Arthasastra, written after 200 BCE, mentions a thigh guard. [2]
[1]: (Dikshit 1980, 266) Durga Prasad Dikshit. 1980. Political History of the Chalukyas of Badami. Abhinav Publications. New Delhi.
[2]: (Olivelle 2016, 142-143) Patrick Olivelle trans. 2016. King, Governance, and Law in Ancient India: Kautilya’s Arthasastra. Oxford University Press. Oxford.
A military historian states that helmets were not widely used until the CE period; soldiers used thick turbans to protect their heads [1] - do ancient Indian specialists agree? Kautilya’s Arthasastra, written after 200 BCE, mentions "dense structures made of the skin, hooves, and horns/tusks of the river dolphin, rhinocerous, Dhenuka, and cattle" used as armor. [2]
[1]: (Gabriel 2002, 220) Gabriel, Richard A. 2002. The Great Armies of Antiquity. Greenwood Publishing Group.
[2]: (Olivelle 2016, 142-143) Patrick Olivelle trans. 2016. King, Governance, and Law in Ancient India: Kautilya’s Arthasastra. Oxford University Press. Oxford.
"Several Chalukyan epigraphs refer to kavacha or armour. A good number of sculptures at Badami, Aihole and Pattadakal show not only armoured soldiers but also caparisoned horses. Metal armours served as shields against attack by enemies, protecting both men and animal forces." [1] Kautilya’s Arthasastra, written after 200 BCE, mentions metal fabric, metal plate, cuirass, corselet, mail and breast plate. [2]
[1]: (Dikshit 1980, 266) Durga Prasad Dikshit. 1980. Political History of the Chalukyas of Badami. Abhinav Publications. New Delhi.
[2]: (Olivelle 2016, 142-143) Patrick Olivelle trans. 2016. King, Governance, and Law in Ancient India: Kautilya’s Arthasastra. Oxford University Press. Oxford.
Earlier period Vakataka "soldiers were provided with armours and helmets." [1] A military historian states that helmets were not widely used until the CE period; soldiers used thick turbans to protect their heads [2] - do ancient Indian specialists agree? "Several Chalukyan epigraphs refer to kavacha or armour. A good number of sculptures at Badami, Aihole and Pattadakal show not only armoured soldiers but also caparisoned horses. Metal armours served as shields against attack by enemies, protecting both men and animal forces." [3]
[1]: (Majumdar and Altekar 1986, 277) Anant Sadashiv Altekar. The Administrative Organisation. Ramesh Chandra Majumdar. Anant Sadashiv Altekar. 1986. Vakataka - Gupta Age Circa 200-550 A.D. Motilal Banarsidass. Delhi.
[2]: (Gabriel 2002, 220) Gabriel, Richard A. 2002. The Great Armies of Antiquity. Greenwood Publishing Group.
[3]: (Dikshit 1980, 266) Durga Prasad Dikshit. 1980. Political History of the Chalukyas of Badami. Abhinav Publications. New Delhi.
In Ancient India soldiers of the Gupta Empire who could afford to do so and were willing to bear the heat (or for night operations?) wore chain mail. [1] "Several Chalukyan epigraphs refer to kavacha or armour. A good number of sculptures at Badami, Aihole and Pattadakal show not only armoured soldiers but also caparisoned horses. Metal armours served as shields against attack by enemies, protecting both men and animal forces." [2] Kautilya’s Arthasastra, written after 200 BCE, mentions a coat of mail. [3]
[1]: (Rowell 2015 89) Rebecca Rowell. 2015. Ancient India. Abdo Publishing. Minneapolis.
[2]: (Dikshit 1980, 266) Durga Prasad Dikshit. 1980. Political History of the Chalukyas of Badami. Abhinav Publications. New Delhi.
[3]: (Olivelle 2016, 142-143) Patrick Olivelle trans. 2016. King, Governance, and Law in Ancient India: Kautilya’s Arthasastra. Oxford University Press. Oxford.
"Several Chalukyan epigraphs refer to kavacha or armour. A good number of sculptures at Badami, Aihole and Pattadakal show not only armoured soldiers but also caparisoned horses. Metal armours served as shields against attack by enemies, protecting both men and animal forces." [1] Kautilya’s Arthasastra, written after 200 BCE, mentions a breastplate.; Kautilya’s Arthasastra, written after 200 BCE, mentions "Helmet, neck guard, cuirass, corselet, mail, breast plate, and thigh guard". [2]
[1]: (Dikshit 1980, 266) Durga Prasad Dikshit. 1980. Political History of the Chalukyas of Badami. Abhinav Publications. New Delhi.
[2]: (Olivelle 2016, 142-143) Patrick Olivelle trans. 2016. King, Governance, and Law in Ancient India: Kautilya’s Arthasastra. Oxford University Press. Oxford.
Contemporary inscriptions mention the "war boats" of both Emperors Vinayaditya and Mangalesha [1] . "There was also a strong division of navy to guard the sea-coast and conduct maritime operations." [2] ’Chalukyas, Pallavas and the Cholas are noted for their naval forces." [3]
[1]: D.P. Dikshit, Political History of the Chalukyas (1980), p. 265
[2]: (Dikshit 1980, 262) Durga Prasad Dikshit. 1980. Political History of the Chalukyas of Badami. Abhinav Publications. New Delhi.
[3]: (Eraly 2011, 163) Abraham Eraly. 2011. The First Spring: The Golden Age of India. Penguin Books India Pvt. Ltd. New Delhi.